Democrats & Liberals Archives

Obama's Victory is America's Victory

He was called naive. He was told he lacked experience. He was warned against confronting the Clinton machine and the Democratic establishment. But Obama paid no attention. He came with a message of unity, of understanding and of all of us working for the common good. His decisive victory in Iowa is a victory for America with reference to its citizens and with reference to the world.

Daily, pundits tell us that our country is so polarized it is tearing us apart. Obama proved these pundits wrong. Iowa, which is 92% white, resoundingly voted for a black candidate. The country is not polarized. Only the politicians are polarized.

Bush and the Republicans for the last 7 years governed in a polarized way. When Congress was in Republican hands they sought to pass laws with only 51% of the vote so they would not need to compromise with Democrats on anything. Now that Congress is in Democratic hands, Republicans have decided to prevent Democrats from achieving anything.

It's hard to blame Democrats who want to get even. They intend to gain power and then use Republican tactics to pass their laws and keep themselves in power. This is what Hillary Clinton wants to do. She keeps on talking how her experience will enable her to win these political battles.

John Edwards says he wants change. What he means by change is that instead of benefiting the rich he would do his best to benefit the poor and the middle class. But he plans to fight for his goals the same way Republicans have fought for their goals. Obama is different. He wants real change. He wants to change the verbal battle to a conversation where everybody is heard and all ideas are considered. He wants to unite the country.

For years we've bemoaned the fact that less that half the people vote in a presidential election. Most of these people do not vote because they believe, not unreasonably, that their vote would not make a difference. Obama, with his message of inclusion, has gotten more people to vote (caucus) in Iowa than ever before. About twice as many participated than did last year. It is estimated that 56% of the Democratic caucus goers were first time voters.

Now, there's a leader!

Obama's win is a great day for America - even if eventually he does not win the nomination. It has demonstrated that Americans do not hate other Americans because of their politics. It also demonstrated to the world what America truly is like. Here are, via Andrew Sullivan, two quotes from overseas newspapers:

Lebanon's Daily Star:

"The very moment [Obama] appears on the world's television screens, victorious and smiling, America's image and soft power would experience something like a Copernican revolution."

From South Africa:

"Damn, I love Americans. Just when you’ve written them off as hopeless, as a nation in decline, they turn around and do something extraordinary, which tells you why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on earth."

Obama's winning this victory in the small state of Iowa will go a long way towards restoring our reputation in the world. It will go a long way towards enhancing our leadership, thereby strengthening us in the struggle to eradicate terrorism.

Obama's victory is America's victory. Imagine what America will be like when Barack Obama wins the Democratic nomination and then wins the general election!

Posted by Paul Siegel at January 4, 2008 6:00 PM
Comments
Comment #242239

Paul, I’m not sure how Obama will approach passing legislation differently from Edwards or Clinton. I mean, he would still have to get a filibuster-proof majority in Congress to go along with anything he wants to pass.

It seems to me that Clinton — with all the triangulating — has a better chance of passing legislation than a guy who will “change the verbal battle to a conversation where everybody is heard and all ideas are considered.”

Posted by: American Pundit at January 4, 2008 6:14 PM
Comment #242243

“Obama’s winning this victory in the small state of Iowa will go a long way towards restoring our reputation in the world.”

Whoa, nelly! Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Winning Iowa is no indicator one way or the other as to a candidate’s success.

I’m just as intrigued by Obama as the next guy, but let’s not start planning his coronation ceremony at the UN just yet… I fail to see how one caucus victory goes anywhere in resoring our reputation in the world?

Posted by: Doug Langworthy at January 4, 2008 6:49 PM
Comment #242256
Obama’s victory is America’s victory.

But why?

He was called naive. He was told he lacked experience.
His decisive victory in Iowa is a victory for America
The country is not polarized. Only the politicians are polarized.
Obama’s win is a great day for America - even if eventually he does not win the nomination. It has demonstrated that Americans do not hate other Americans because of their politics.



The following are bills Congress should pass to reduce health care costs and leave more money in the pockets of families:

HR 3075 provides truly comprehensive health care reform by allowing families to claim a tax credit for the rising cost of health insurance premiums. With many families now spending close to $1000 or even more for their monthly premiums, they need real tax relief— including a dollar-for-dollar credit for every cent they spend on health care premiums— to make medical care more affordable.
HR 3076 is specifically designed to address the medical malpractice crisis that threatens to drive thousands of American doctors- especially obstetricians- out of business. The bill provides a dollar-for-dollar tax credit that permits consumers to purchase “negative outcomes” insurance prior to undergoing surgery or other serious medical treatments. Negative outcomes insurance is a novel approach that guarantees those harmed receive fair compensation, while reducing the burden of costly malpractice litigation on the health care system. Patients receive this insurance payout without having to endure lengthy lawsuits, and without having to give away a large portion of their award to a trial lawyer. This also drastically reduces the costs imposed on physicians and hospitals by malpractice litigation. Under HR 3076, individuals can purchase negative outcomes insurance at essentially no cost.
HR 3077 makes it more affordable for parents to provide health care for their children. It creates a $500 per child tax credit for medical expenses and prescription drugs that are not reimbursed by insurance. It also creates a $3,000 tax credit for dependent children with terminal illnesses, cancer, or disabilities. Parents who are struggling to pay for their children’s medical care, especially when those children have serious health problems or special needs, need every extra dollar.
HR 3078 is commonsense, compassionate legislation for those suffering from cancer or other terminal illnesses. The sad reality is that many patients battling serious illnesses will never collect Social Security benefits— yet they continue to pay into the Social Security system. When facing a medical crisis, those patients need every extra dollar to pay for medical care, travel, and family matters. HR 3078 waives the employee portion of Social Security payroll taxes (or self-employment taxes) for individuals with documented serious illnesses or cancer. It also suspends Social Security taxes for primary caregivers with a sick spouse or child. There is no justification or excuse for collecting Social Security taxes from sick individuals who literally are fighting for their lives.
Posted by: Weary Willie at January 4, 2008 9:45 PM
Comment #242258

I have said that America is less likely to elect a black man than a woman. Perhaps I am wrong and America hates women more than I thought. It’ll be interesting whichever way it goes. We already seen the Republicans talking about the Hilary cackle and her lack of attractiveness.

I can’t wait for the “Niggah” jokes. Rush is licking his chops as I type. Maybe Huckabee will have a disembodied noose float behind his head in another ad, which of course was really a bookcase.

Posted by: googlumpugus at January 4, 2008 9:56 PM
Comment #242259
John Edwards says he wants change. What he means by change is that instead of benefiting the rich he would do his best to benefit the poor and the middle class. But he plans to fight for his goals the same way Republicans have fought for their goals. Obama is different. He wants real change. He wants to change the verbal battle to a conversation where everybody is heard and all ideas are considered. He wants to unite the country.

All well and good, but an even better idea would be to get Edwards to be his running mate.
Isn’t it always a good idea to have a bit of both of those mindsets in play when running against the GOP?(Remember how painful it was to watch Lieberman try to fill the “scrapper” role? Ouch.)

Besides, Edwards has a far better health care plan, and Obama might be very favorably influenced by many of his ideas. And vice versa. These are two strong candidates, and if combined, they’d cover every base needed to win in November.

Posted by: veritas vincit at January 4, 2008 10:01 PM
Comment #242260

Just curious … we’ve heard how the vote broke down for whites, old, young, men, women … how did it break down for latinos & blacks?
I did see that there are more latinos in Iowa than blacks.

I can’t recall who said it and when BUT it was said that many blacks won’t vote for Obama because he is ‘too white’.
We have been told that blacks & latinos don’t like each other in our nation.
That ‘white america’ would NEVER vote for a black man no matter how articulate.

I was also surprised to hear Jesse Jackson say our nation has ‘matured’. That was fast!!! We went from a horribly racist nation to a ‘mature’ nation where blacks and whites get along in about 6 months!!!
Jesse will be out of a job!!

Posted by: marie at January 4, 2008 10:04 PM
Comment #242261
The problems with our health care system are not the result of too little government intervention, but rather too much.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/261/diagnosing-our-health-care-woes/


we should recognize that the federal government has virtually mandated HMOs on the American people

http://www.ronpaul2008.com/articles/217/patients-bill-of-rights-or-federal-takeover-of-medicine/

Posted by: Weary Willie at January 4, 2008 10:14 PM
Comment #242268

Paul:

Obama is naive and lacks experience.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at January 4, 2008 11:07 PM
Comment #242277

Washington DC is a strange town. Even Obama can be the President (which I doubt very much because American are not yet ready for a non WASP president), he will very soon be “house-trained”. (Or “enlightened by lobbyists” if you will)

These days, only people like Bush who serves the Big corporates and the Rich well can be President.

Posted by: jackaroo at January 5, 2008 12:37 AM
Comment #242306

If Obama eventually becomes the candidate, I will be voting for him. I already voted for him twice. I guess our primary in IL is about a month away. The media and local pols here are crazy for him, but Hillary is still my preference. Obama will basically have to go to school. If he eventually wins, Carter and Clinton should school him from election day to inauguration day, but why vote in the primary for someone who has ideas but little experience?

Posted by: ohrealy at January 5, 2008 11:33 AM
Comment #242316

This frequently repeated claim both here and in the mainstream media that Obama doesn’t have enough professional and life experience to be an effective president is pure hogwash. Senator Obama is a highly intelligent guy (Rhodes Scholar, Bachelors in political science from Columbia, Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School, President of the Harvard Law Review) who has had more than enough experience to make a really great president.

I can’t help but find it funny how Hillary and all the Clintonistas now claim that “experience” is such an all important factor for the presidency. Back in 1992 they would all have had to claim the exact opposite was true in order to support Bill Clinton, a governor who had had absolutely no foreign policy experience at all. In contrast, Obama has already been serving on three of the four Senate Committees dealing with foreign policy issues: Foreign Relations, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and Veterans’ Affairs. He’s also the Chair of the Foreign Relations Subcommittee for Europe, which happens to be responsible for our relations with NATO and the European Union.
During her time in the Senate, Hillary Clinton has served on the Armed Services Committee, that’s it.

Posted by: veritas vincit at January 5, 2008 2:04 PM
Comment #242319

Paul
In reference to Edwards you sai he plans to fight for his goals the same as Republicans do.What is wrong with that? You may have noticed that the Republicans were successful in cramming their agenda down our throats.Obamas plan to give evryone a seat at the table is like inviting the local burgler over for dinner to discuss home security.


veritas vincit

An Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama! Now there is a ticket to get behind.

Posted by: BillS at January 5, 2008 2:50 PM
Comment #242320

I would agree, veritas, that experience isn’t always what it’s cracked up to be. How do we gain experience other than going out and diving into something and learning by it. (With the exception of Dubya,) Most people learn pretty quickly by jumping into the fray… We also know and understand that advisors should be assigned or appointed based on thier areas of expertise.
I am not fully in line to support him, as I’m still hoping Edwards can go all the way, but if that doesn’t happen, then absolutely Obama will get my vote and encouragement.

Posted by: Jane Doe at January 5, 2008 2:54 PM
Comment #242430

John Edwards/Bill Richardson, now there’s the ticket!

Posted by: Postal Grunt at January 6, 2008 10:11 PM
Comment #242438

Hey! Personality contests are for homecoming queen campaigns. I can’t believe that people are going ga- ga over a politician that can’t point to one thing that he’s done for the people of Illinois! The United States is in unprecedented state of distress. We watch this guy show that a black man can run a successful presidential campaign. Right on Bro! I am black too but I remeber when we had the greatest economic upturn in the history of the country,when we fought to help people around the world who had no oil for us usurp,when there was genuine attempt to bring us a national health care system. It was this attempt that started the public villification of Hillary by the so- called health care industry! Barack Obama presents himself as the anti- establishment candidate but how is the establishment treating him? With praise and fawning! They WANT him to be the candidate! Compare his treatment in the media with that of Senator Clinton and you’ll see who the true anti-establishment candidate is!

Posted by: wes at January 7, 2008 7:49 AM
Comment #242452

To me, Edwards is the least acceptable of all the democrats. He keeps saying that lobbyists will have no place in his administration, but the major problem has been with lobbying in Congress. The White House only listens to lobbyists who agree with them, or the ones where the members of the administration came from and will be going to after they leave office.

Obama should do well in red states on Super Tuesday since his experience is all theoretical. There are red state answers and blue state answers to most questions. The red state answers are based on the theoretical. The blue state answers are based on reality.

Posted by: orhealy at January 7, 2008 11:24 AM
Comment #242454
Hey! Personality contests are for homecoming queen campaigns.
Can’t you see that you’re tilting at windmills here? Much like Bill Clinton, Obama has loads of personality and charisma, too. And just like Bill Clinton, Obama is a great communicator who is capable of bringing out the best in people. This is the definition of good leadership.
I can’t believe that people are going ga- ga over a politician

It’s the hope he’s giving to people after these years of Bush negativity, incompetence and failure. It’s the willingness to try once more, even in the wake of all the horrible, nasty, selfish Bush/Cheney/Rove decisiveness, to reach out and attempt to respectfully reason with our opponents across the aisle.

that can’t point to one thing that he’s done for the people of Illinois!

That’s not true. As a State Senator and as a Senator Obama has worked hard for his state and for the nation. Saying he has done nothing, and distorting the record is the kind of canned criticism that Hillary Clinton and her followers have now been reduced to.
Most people aren’t buying this — even Edwards supporters like myself.

The United States is in unprecedented state of distress.

And since Hillary has become the epitome of a Washington insider (with all the corruption that entails), and a corporatist, and a supporter of the illegal and immoral Iraq Occupation, that distress isn’t likely to let up any time soon if she’s at the helm of this nation.

We watch this guy show that a black man can run a successful presidential campaign.

Yes, very successful.
FYI, that kind of management and deft ability to juggle a multitude of details, is often an excellent indicator of how a person will do when they are running the country.

I am black too

I am white, and I think we should all be rejoicing in the fact that Dr. King’s Dream is finally becoming a Reality!

but I remeber when we had the greatest economic upturn in the history of the country,when we fought to help people around the world who had no oil for us usurp,when there was genuine attempt to bring us a national health care system.
But we’re Progressives, which means we realize that we can’t ever bring back former days, no matter how good they might have been. We keep thinking hard, and looking ahead, and moving forward. That’s what we do best! Sometimes our ideas have failed to meet those goals, sure, but that just means we adjust things, or come up with some new ideas, until we succeed. Once again, it looks like we Democrats are going to have to be the ones who dig the country out of another deep hole that has been made by a bunch of short sighted Republicans (who didn’t know how to lead, or bring out the best in this nation).
It was this attempt that started the public villification of Hillary by the so- called health care industry!
Look, she didn’t pass any health care reform at all when she had the chance. Instead, she completely failed We the People in that regard. She obviously worked hard on her plan and faced an uphill battle with the Congressional GOP majority, yet instead of doing everything she could to work with those people - to try to get us at least half a loaf - she chose to do nothing. Now she is accepting huge sums of money from the health care industry in order to run her presidential campaign. This country is starving for real leadership on this issue, but we’re not so naive as to expect we’ll be getting it from Hillary Clinton.
Barack Obama presents himself as the anti- establishment candidate but how is the establishment treating him? With praise and fawning!

Like John Edwards, Obama has not been in Washington long enough to be an insider. That’s just a fact. The media may be fawning, but that’s only to be expected. They always fawn over any candidate who draws such huge, excited crowds of people, and who poll with huge leads.

They WANT him to be the candidate!


They go where the excitement goes. The excitement is with Obama at the moment. That could change, or it could continue to build momentum.

Compare his treatment in the media with that of Senator Clinton and you’ll see who the true anti-establishment candidate is!

Clinton has a long history of shutting the media out completely. This has not changed a bit until very recently. In contrast, Obama has made himself very accessible all along, and they like him a lot for it. Edwards has too, but they are naturally giving him short shrift because his message is even more populist and anti-establishment than Obama’s is, and after all, they do work for giant corporations.

Posted by: veritas vincit at January 7, 2008 11:45 AM
Comment #242485

I’ll throw this out and leave myself vulnerable for an attack. This is the church that Obama attends. In “About Us” check out item #4. I don’t consider myself to be racist, and I’m just looking for other interpretations. One would think that a candidate for Pres. of the United States, would consider America his (or her) greatest commitment.
http://www.tucc.org/home.htm

Posted by: Jane Doe at January 7, 2008 3:29 PM
Comment #242488

Jane Doe:

One would think that a candidate for Pres. of the United States, would consider America his (or her) greatest commitment.

How do we know Obama’s commitment to America doesn’t come first for him personally? He is an American, after all. Do you feel we should judge Obama negatively because that list posted on the website of the church he attends? Also, what is wrong exactly with a largely African-American congregation making a commitment to the many problems of Africa? Obama has relatives there, so I can’t see him having too great a problem with such stated commitment from his church.
Many Jewish synagogues and their members have made a similar commitment toward the state of Isreal, have they not?
Maybe I don’t understand the objection?

Posted by: veritas vincit at January 7, 2008 3:52 PM
Comment #242492

I do not see anything objectionable about Obama’s church, but it looks like people are just throwing everything against the wall to see if they can find something that will stick. My main objection to Obama as a candidate is that I do not want to be preached at by the POTUS. He should study all 7 seasons of The West Wing to learn about the reality of trying to repair the world after fixing all of us. It sounds just a little bit megalomaniacal when taken out of context, but the reality is often a great deal more complicated than theories.

Posted by: ohrealy at January 7, 2008 4:18 PM
Comment #242498

If you’ll read my post, I said it would leave me open to attack, and obviously I was right.
The information I put on there is going around in an email, which I received this morning. You might guess that it came from one of my very right-leaning, conservative friends.
I merely wanted opinions and feedback without having to duck for cover.

Posted by: Jane Doe at January 7, 2008 4:36 PM
Comment #242570

Hate to talk about investments, but tomorrow would probably be a good time to buy futures in Hillary as a nominee.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at January 8, 2008 2:38 PM
Comment #242610

I just said this in the Repulican column. I’ll repeat it here and add a little.

I just watched Obama’s “Yes, we can” speech in NH.
It was impressive. I had read about his abillty to speak with inspiration, but until now hadn’t seen it. I had seen most of his speech’s as Ho-Hum, but this one moved me.

I could see him as President. Not a bad image for America.

Posted by: googlumpugus at January 9, 2008 12:07 AM
Post a comment